Some Countries Have Legal Ages at Which People Can Drink. Other Countries Believe Not Having Strict Laws Is a Better Policy. Discuss Both Sides and Give Your Own Opinion.
There is a controversial debate regarding, in a few countries, there is no need to have an uncompromising law against the individuals who can drink. However, others argue that we must impose stronger restrictions on them. This essay will discuss both views as far as I am concerned. I am in favor of the former notion.
To commence with, the primary argument the supporters put forward is that numerous countries want youngsters not to consume any alcoholic drinks, drugs, and cigarettes because these are not physically or mentally suitable for them. To explain it, if they easily get drugs without permission, they would become targets of drug trafficking. To epitome, the age limit for purchasing alcohol is set by the U.S.(United States) at 20 years old. As a result, it is proved that many people, especially girls, put themselves into prostitution by the habit of taking drugs in undeveloped countries.
Shifting towards another view, why do we not have to impose strict restrictions on age limitations to buy alcoholic drinks? Everyone can obtain beer or whiskey from wine shops. In other words, everyone should be free to acquire a product unless and until their behavior is illegal. Thus, they abolish the barriers related to age that give justice and happiness. For instance, with this constitution, basically, the smuggling of drugs must be diminished, as well as rule premises. Every person’s happiness and justice could be achieved.
In a nutshell, after discussing both, I must say that even though both the arguments have their weightage. On balance, however, I believe that having strict rules for different ages must be obligatory in every single country around the world as drugs expand the infant mortality rate.